The Scheme relies entirely on information submitted by volunteers. If you would like to submit your observations, the information we need for each observation is as follows:

Name of the species. Ideally use the name from the checklist on this web-site, but we can deal with names from any recognised checklist - providing you tell us which one you are using.

Date of the observation. e.g. 13/04/2003

Grid reference. This is by far the best way of indicating where you made the observation. Please be as accurate as is feasible given the map or GPS you are using, but on the other hand there is little point giving a very accurate grid reference if you have wandered around a large area and your observations could come from anywhere within it. Ideally, give a 6-figure reference (e.g. TL108982).

Location name. The name of the site you visited. Ideally use a name that appears on the OS Landranger (1:50,000) maps since that can then be cross-checked against the grid ref. via the OS Gazetteer. If you know you were on a nature reserve or protected site of some sort, it helps to use its recognised name (e.g. Castor Hanglands NNR).

Vice-county. The Watsonian vice-county system, devised in the mid 19th century, is widely used for biological recording because the boundaries of vice-counties are fixed and well known - unlike modern local authority boundaries which are subject to frequent change. Giving both the grid reference and the vice-county allows for useful cross-checking.

Recorder's name. The name of the person who made the observation.

Determiner's name. The name of the person who identified the hoverfly, if different from the recorder (e.g. somebody who later checked the identity of a photograph or specimen).

Other information. There are many other details which can make a record more useful. How many individuals were about? This can be useful even if it is quite general (e.g. "few", "many"). What were they doing? Records of the flowers visited by hoverflies are always useful as are records of behaviour like courtship or egg laying. What was the habitat like? Try and be specific.

Many people keep there records on some form of computerised system these days and records in computerised format are very welcome. See the postings below for advice on how to submit in a variety of common formats.

If you prefer to submit records on paper, then a recording card is available. But, if you just make notes in your field note book, we will be happy to receive a photo-copy - providing they are legible!

Last edited by stuart on Sat Nov 10, 2007 3:40 pm; edited 1 time in total

It may seem a bit tedious submitting records of widespread and commonplace spp but I think that they should be forwarded to Stuart at least once per year. In that way it will be possible to quickly highlight those "common" species which are. for some reason, having a bad year. For example, have the catastrophic floods in some areas affected those species with larvae of the "rat-tailed maggot" type?. My garden was so flooded that they'd have needed breathing tubes a metre or more long!

As Tony rightly points out - even common species are useful - the problem is that people treat recording schemes as dot map producers - but actually a great deal more can be done with data. For example we have a pretty good picture of how climate change is affecting several species including the likes of common species such as Epistrophe eligans - yet if we don't get records we cannot do as much.

Equally - we might pick up crashes through absence of records but would miss them if no-one thought common species to be worth noting. A good ecxample might be Volucella zonaria - if we get a series of bad winters it could easily contract its range and yet we would not know unless we have a network of regular recorders - so - your records are very useful. However, care needed with tricky species - so do send material to me for checking.

If I still only have the one record at the end of the year are you still interested? And would you like me to post the image here so some of your chaps can confirm it's id (although the person who ided it is probably a member )

We are always interested in records provided they can be veified. In the case of common species, these are actually quite useful. For example, we know a lot about Rhingia campestris because we have lots of records.

That said, we are also keen to see more difficult species - specimens always welcome - I'll ID them

I have three records of common species caught in a moth trap in Pembrokeshire and identified for me by Graham Watkeys from photos I placed on Facebook. Should I put them on iRecord, or do I put them on this site?

I cannot see a place to log records?

Maybe iRecords is the best place because I can put everything on that one site?

No need to Irecord.
If you join the group and post your images there then Roger will pick up the records directly (and you will be given help with Ids if you are not sure.
It's a great group.
Just remember to add the date and grid reference when you post you images so that they can be made into a viable record.
The maps have been broken on here for a long while now - Stuart it building a new website and the maps work there.
http://sgbtest.me.uk/hrs/

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou cannot download files in this forum